Mark Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan announce baby girl – and $45bn charity initiative

[umbertino]

In a Facebook post to newborn child Max, the Facebook CEO says he will administer the initiative himself using 99% of shares in company’s stock

 

 

Sam Thielman in New York

 

Tuesday 1 December 2015 22.26 GMT

 

 

 

 

The Zuckerbergs announced two births on Tuesday: a baby girl, and to one of the world’s biggest charities.

 

That sterling spoon you might have been considering for Mark Zuckerberg’s new baby may no longer be the most exciting gift to the Facebook billionaire’s daughter: after revealing his wife, Priscilla Chan, had given birth to their first child, Max, Zuckerberg announced the creation of a charity organization called the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative.

 

The couple have pledged to give away 99% of their Facebook shares in their lifetime, currently worth about $45bn.

 

The charity, which has “the mission of advancing human potential and promoting equality”, will be administered by the CEO himself and is already on track to be worth $3bn by 2018.

 

Zuckerberg announced the move on Facebook in the form of a letter to his baby:

Dear Max,

Your mother and I don’t yet have the words to describe the hope you give us for the future. Your new life is full of promise, and we hope you will be happy and healthy so you can explore it fully. You’ve already given us a reason to reflect on the world we hope you live in.

Like all parents, we want you to grow up in a world better than ours today.

While headlines often focus on what’s wrong, in many ways the world is getting better. Health is improving. Poverty is shrinking. Knowledge is growing. People are connecting. Technological progress in every field means your life should be dramatically better than ours today.

We will do our part to make this happen, not only because we love you, but also because we have a moral responsibility to all children in the next generation.

We believe all lives have equal value, and that includes the many more people who will live in future generations than live today. Our society has an obligation to invest now to improve the lives of all those coming into this world, not just those already here.

 

Zuckerberg plans to finance the endeavor using his stock options. Some 99% of his shares will go to the charity – the tech tycoon owns 4m shares of class A common stock and 419m shares of class B, which have the majority of voting rights.

 

“[D]uring his lifetime, he will gift or otherwise direct substantially all of his shares of Facebook stock, or the net after-tax proceeds from sales of such shares, to further the mission of advancing human potential and promoting equality by means of philanthropic, public advocacy, and other activities for the public good,” the company said in the filing.

 

Joel Fleishman, professor of law and public policy sciences at Duke University, said he believed the announcement would spur giving among the super-rich.

 

“I follow this pretty closely and hardly a day goes by that somebody doesn’t say he’s going to give away all his assets to charity,” Fleishman said, noting that Zuckerberg’s early-years Facebook colleague Dustin Moskovitz and his wife Cari Tuna said they were going to give away their fortune, which amounts to some $8bn, as well. “It does exemplify the spirit of the times.”

 

Fleishman observed that the project had become particularly popular among the young and extraordinarily wealthy, who prefer “giving while living” to willing their assets to charity. “I celebrate his decision to do it as I celebrate Warren Buffet’s decision to give all that money to the Gates Foundation. People who’ve made all that money are by nature competitive; someone that young giving away that much money will undoubtedly stimulate others to do likewise.”

 

But it’s not the executive’s first foray into charity, nor the first this week. Zuckerberg, Bill Gates, Richard Branson and others announced an initiative to invest in new energy sources to stem the rising tide of climate change on Monday.

 

Results of his previous philanthropic efforts have been mixed: In 2010, Zuckerberg partnered with then-mayor of Newark, New Jersey, Cory Booker (who has since become the state’s junior senator) to improve the notoriously poor-quality schools in the city with a donation of $100m. The endeavor was widely criticized for the percentage of the gift that went to pay consultants, among other problems.

 

FWD.us, a political advocacy group started by Zuckerberg and Gates, has also stalled after its efforts to lobby for immigration reform failed, despite some $50m in backing from big-name tech personalities.

 

 

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/dec/01/mark-zuckerberg-and-priscilla-chan-announce-new-baby-and-massive-charity-initiative

[Whatshername]

Mark Zuckerberg plans to toss 44 billion dollars in the garbage

 

By Ed Straker

 

 

If you were wealthy and your first child was just born, what would be the first thing you would do? Give away all your money so your child would get almost nothing, right? Well, that's the decent parental instincts of Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg, who penned an open letter to his newly born daughter telling her that she would never, ever see 99% of the 45 Facebook billion dollars he had made. His daughter Max will surely appreciate his noble gesture.

 

Instead, he plans to give it all to his charitable foundation, I mean his LLC, the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative.

 

In case you are worried that the money will be spent on something useful, you needn't be concerned. If the Zuckerberg's past charitable expenses are any guide, it will be about as impactful as President Obama's 1 trillion dollar stimulus.

 

For example, In 2010 Zuckerberg gave a hundred million dollars to the corrupt and inept Newark school system.

 

The result?

 

Watching the $200 million iceberg (Mr. Zuckerberg’s $100 million donation was contingent on raising a matching amount) slowly melt into an ocean of recrimination over the course of 256 brisk pages can be a sometimes painful exercise. The union boss, Joe Del Grosso, demanded a ransom of $31 million to compensate for what he felt members should have received in previous years — before agreeing to discuss any labor reforms. The superintendent, Cami Anderson, demanded accountability from schools but set her own performance goals only after the academic year was largely over and relied on expensive consultants — whose total bill ultimately exceeded $20 million — without clear objectives long after she had promised to recruit a permanent leadership team.

 

Money poured down a rathole. What else has Zuck wasted money on?

 

Facebook partnered with teachers at Summit Public Schools (also a grantee of Startup:Education) to help students reach their full potential through an approach known as personalized learning, which allows students to become active participants in their education.

This was the first time in history that students were participants in their education. Before that, it was an out-of-body experience as they watched themselves being educated from another plane of existence.

 

As part of our commitment to personalized learning, we invested $5 million in MasteryConnect to support K-12 educators as they adopt competency-based learning in the classroom.

 

Did the competency-based learning replace incompetency-based learning? I hope so!

 

“We must build technology to make change. Many institutions invest money in these challenges, but most progress comes from productivity gains through innovation,” they wrote in the letter to their daughter. “We must participate in policy and advocacy to shape debates. Many institutions are unwilling to do this, but progress must be supported by movements to be sustainable.”

 

That last part sounds like a euphamism for fighting constipation.

 

This week, Mr. Zuckerberg was also one of the billionaires who signed on to the Breakthrough Energy Coalition, a group organized by the Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates to contribute toward a multibillion-dollar clean energy fund.

 

We already have breakthrough energy sources. They are called coal, oil, and natural gas. They work so well that they are ten times cheaper than solar and wind energy.

 

Instead of doing nutty, faddy, wasteful things with their money, why don't they do the ultimate thing that will improve tens of thousands of lives: create more companies and more employment. The more businesses there are creating things, the more people are employed, the more families are self supporting, the better off every one is. Capitalism is one of the greatest sources of improvement of mankind.

Or, alternatively, why doesn't Zuckerberg take that 44 billion dollars and burn it. By taking 44 billion dollars out of the money supply Zuckerberg will contribute to a dramatic strengthening of the dollar. It may not be much against the 24/7 printing presses of the Federal Reserve, but it will make more of a contribution than the dopey causes the Chan Zuckerbergs plan to waste their money on.

[Jaxinjersey]

Thanks for bringing the rebuttal WHN!  And frankly, I hold no "stock" in the over-inflated value of a social media company.  

[Shabibilicious]

Like    

 

GO RV, then BV

[Indraman]

I tend to be more of a Libertarian when it comes to doing what you want with your own money. If MZ wants to give money to LIB' money pits, it is his choice. When Koch brothers give to CON' organizations, they should have the same level of considerations given to them. The problem is the LEFT is much more vocal when it comes to this issue as they don't believe anyone should have the freedom to do what they want with their money. To prove this claim, look how many on the LEFT support estate taxes. This is a DOUBLE tax on money that was rightfully earned and already taxed; however, the LEFT will do anything to control as much of people's lives as they possibly can. It is time for the people of this country to stand up to Big GOVERNMENT and return power back to the states and the people.

Indy

[nstoolman1]

I don't have a problem when people do what they want with THEIR money.

 

My problem is with "People" doing what they want with MY money without my say so.